Americans are shocked when a news report reveals that an American has turned up in Syria fighting for the terrorists. If the jihadist is then identified as a Somali immigrant who settled in Minnesota but never assimilated to the American way of life, there is a sigh of relief, perhaps accompanied by concern that so many immigrants are currently coming from regions plagued by religious hatreds and terrorist wars. The concern is real but the relief is a false one, based on a misunderstanding of the many dimensions of the “grand jihad” being waged by terrorist parties like the Muslim Brotherhood.

This week I traveled to the Midwest to speak at Ohio State, home of the Buckeyes, to an audience of 130 students. My subject was the campus war being waged against Israel by two student fronts for the Muslim Brotherhood – the Muslim Students Association and the Committee for Justice in Palestine. These groups are not themselves terrorists. But they are carrying out a propaganda war crafted by terrorists that is designed to help Hamas “obliterate” the Jewish state by portraying it as a criminal occupier of Palestinian land.

More than half the students attending were members of the two organizations and supporters of the Hamas terror campaign. I attempted to refute the lies they were spreading at Ohio State (Israel is an occupier of Palestinian land; Israel is an apartheid state). Their Jewish targets, I explained, were just the canaries in the mine. Already there were far more Christians slaughtered by the soldiers of Mohammed, and Muslims too. But those numbers I said will be dwarfed should the day come when the Islamic Republic of Iran drops a nuclear bomb on Tel Aviv.

The Muslim Students Association, which is a presence on more than a hundred campuses, is supported by college funds and accorded campus privileges. It is a recruitment organization for the Muslim Brotherhood. Many members of the MSA, as I also said, are innocent of the true agendas organization. Those with political potential are selected for training seminars taught by Brotherhood leaders. Nine former presidents of MSA have gone on to high-level careers with al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups. The most famous is Anwar al-Awlaki, formerly the head of al-Qaeda in the Yemen, killed in a U.S. drone strike. Before that, Awlaki was the president of the Muslim Students Association at Colorado State.

The centerpiece of the pro-terrorist propaganda campaigns conducted by these groups on American campuses is a Hamas-created 4-panel map. The map purports to show that a Muslim state called Palestine (colored in green) existed in 1946 and was then infiltrated by Jews (represented by the color white) until a point is reached at which Palestine is completely occupied. The map, like the other Hamas propaganda points placed by the students on their “Apartheid Walls” is a lie. There was no Palestinian state in 1946. There was no self-identified “Palestinian” cause until 1964 when the Arabs dropped their stated goal to “push the Jews into the sea,” and formed the “Palestine Liberation Organization” to protest Jewish occupation of their alleged homeland.

The sixty or so student supporters of these Hamas agendas remained civil during my talk. No doubt the presence of eight armed police the university assigned had something to do with that. When I finished, about 20 of them lined up at the microphone. From the moment the first one began to speak it was clear that this was going to be an orchestrated protest. Instead of asking questions they read speeches off their cell phones. Because the speeches had been written before I spoke they were not responses to anything I actually said, but more Hamas propaganda: “You said that all Muslims are terrorists.” In fact I had said exactly the opposite – that most Muslims were law-abiding people who only wanted peace and that many Muslims were in fact being slaughtered and oppressed by Islamic terrorists including the Palestinians of Gaza and the West Bank.

However, my words fell on deaf ears, as they had all evening. Not only the comments but the cheers for the pro-Hamas speakers made this abundantly clear. These were thoroughly indoctrinated young Americans, committed to a genocidal cause. Among them was an elected member of the student government at Ohio State, who volunteered that he had prepared a proposal in behalf of the Committee for Justice in Palestine requesting student funds to finance its pro-terrorist propaganda campaign.

Like this:

In 2013, Egyptian media claimed President Barack Obama is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB). Leading the charge was Tahani al-Gebali, Vice President of the Supreme Constitutional Court in Egypt. He spoke on a TV program, Bitna al-Kibir, insisting there would a time when a number of conspiracies against his nation would be exposed, including why Obama’s support of the Brotherhood remained steadfast, even as they became despised by Egyptians themselves. The most damning indictment? “Obama’s brother is one of the architects of investment for the international organization of the Muslim Brotherhood,” al-Gebali declared.

The brother to whom al-Gebali referred is Obama’s half brother Malik Obama. He has been under investigation by Egyptian authorities for his ties to the Islamic Da’wa Organization (IDO), an entity created by the Sudanese Government. That government has been on the State Department’s list of of designated terror sponsors since 1993.

IDO’s agenda is all about spreading the virulent Wahhabist strain of Islam across Africa, and Malik has operated as the IDO’s Executive Secretary. In 2010 he not only attended the IDO’s conference in the Sudanese capitol of Khartoum, he supervised it, insisted journalists Walid Shoebat and Ben Barrack. That conference was also attended by Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for crimes against humanity. Malik’s boss, IDO Chairman Suar Al Dahab also attended. That would be the same Suar Al Dahab photographed together with Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, and the MB’s spiritual leader, Yusuf Al-Qaradawi.

Shoebat and Barrack address “naysayers” who argue that President Obama shouldn’t be held accountable for his brother’s actions. “Those who make such charges encounter problems because Barack and his brother are very close. Each was the best man at the other’s wedding and Malik has made multiple visits to the White House,” they explain.

Moreover, Malik is not Obama’s only relative involved in “charity work” of a questionable nature. Along with Malik, Sarah Obama, the president’s step-grandmother, was engaged in fund-raising operations for the Barack H. Obama Foundation (BHOF), founded in 2008 by Malik in memory of their father, and the Mama Sarah Obama Foundation (MSOF) founded in 2009. These non-profits were ostensibly engaged in raising money to build homes for widows, orphans and HIV/AIDs victims in in Kogelo, Kenya.

However, in 2011 the New York Postrevealed the dubious nature of that assertion. “President Obama’s half-brother runs an off-the-books American charity that claims to support poor Kenyans — but it lies about its federal status and no one knows how it spends its money,” the paper reported, further noting that photos on the BHOF website are the only purported evidence that the nonprofit has accomplished any part of its mission.

The Post also noted that BHOF “claims to be a tax-exempt, federally recognized nonprofit. It is not.”

Enter the IRS. In May 2011, BHOF not only received tax-exempt status from the IRS in what the Daily Caller described as “an unprecedented timeline that stands in stark contrast to conservative organizations that have been waiting for more than three years, in some cases, for approval,” it received retroactive status, dating back to December 2008. This despite IRS rules making it illegal to operate longer than 27 months without an IRS determination. Regardless, BHOF’s tax-exempt status was approved.

As for the MSOF, it was revealed in 2012 by Shoebat that the bulk of its funding “goes not to widows and orphans but to provide scholarships to study Shariah at the most influential Wahhabist centers in Saudi Arabia.” “It’s all a jihadi Kenyan scam,” he continued. “And it’s not as though President Obama is unaware of his Kenyan family workings, since Musa on Al-Jazeera disclosed that President Obama’s favorite uncle, Sayid Hussein Obama, was selected by Obama and by the family in Kenya to act as the main conduit in relaying the family’s activities to the White House.” Sayid accompanied Obama’s grandmother to the president’s 2009 inauguration.

Obama’s first cousin, Musa Ismail Obama, who maintained a relationship with Sayid and promoted MSOF in his own right, exposed the true nature of the charity in an interview with Al-Jazeera TV. He revealed “the bulk of the Sarah Fund as it turns out sends little to widows and orphans while the rest goes towards giving free scholarships to studying Sharia at the most influential Wahhabist centers in Saudi Arabia.” When asked about his communications with the president, Musa confirmed that Uncle Sayid was the conduit for communication.

In September 2014, Muslim Brotherhood expert Abdel Reheem Ali added even more fuel to the fire. In an article appearing on the El-Mogaz website, Ali made an explosive allegation. “Malik Obama has much to do with the international organization of the Muslim Brotherhood and attended all meetings of the organization that declared war in 1996. He is a war criminal and terrorist,” he wrote.

“Had this been revealed prior to the election, during Barack Obama’s campaign, Malik’s brother would not have been elected. It was he (Malik) who brought in Khairat Al-Shater, Ayman Ali and Youssef Nada to meet with Obama during the election and pledged the support of Muslims in America. Obama employed the Secretary of State for the escalation of the Muslim Brotherhood in any way shape or form, and there is a report prepared by one of the intelligence units confirmed that Mohammed Morsi was the President of the Republic before the results were even announced.”

Shoebat reported these allegations, which he initially viewed with skepticism. That skepticism was dissipated by a series of discoveries. They included top secret Egyptian documents related to the IDO’s dealing with the Muslim Brotherhood in connection with Essam el-Haddad, father of former Clinton employee Gehad El-Haddad, a revelation that could implicate the Clintons’ and the Obamas’ complicity in endangering America’s national security; a 2010 photo Malik himself posted on his website, showing him clad in a Hamas keffiyeh with the slogan “Jerusalem is ours –we are coming!” and a map of Palestine that says, “From the River to the Sea!”; evidence of Malik’s connections to Hamas financing; IDO’s partnering with the Hamas-created Union of Good (UG) to finance terrorism; and a video in which Sayid claims the entire Obama family are “all Muslim.”

Furthermore, a 2013 report by Raymond Ibrahim implicates the MB and ousted Egyptian President Mohamed Mursi in the Benghazi attacks. Ibrahim translated an internal Libyan government memo that revealed six people, “all of them Egyptians” from the jihad group Ansar al-Sharia were arrested, and during interrogations “confessed to very serious and important information concerning the financial sources of the group and the planners of the event and the storming and burning of the U.S. consulate in Benghazi…. And among the more prominent figures whose names were mentioned by cell members during confessions were: Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi; preacher Safwat Hegazi; Saudi businessman Mansour Kadasa, owner of the satellite station, Al-Nas; Egyptian Sheikh Muhammad Hassan; former presidential candidate, Hazim Salih Abu Isma’il…”

Ibrahim believes murdered American Ambassador Chris Stevens was supposed to be taken hostage so he could be traded for Omar Abdel-Rahman, aka the Blind Sheik, convicted for orchestrating the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993. And while the rioting against U.S. Embassies on Sept. 11, 2012 began in Egypt, kidnapping an American from a neighboring nation would be less conspicuous, even as Morsi and other MB members were calling for Abdel-Rahman’s release. “Needless to say, at this point, tens of millions of Egyptians are convinced that U.S. leadership is fully aware of the Brotherhood’s connection to Benghazi—and hence desperately pushing for the release of Brotherhood leadership, lest, when they are tried in Egypt’s courts, all these scandals become common knowledge,” Ibrahim posits.

These revelations go a long way towards explaining President Obama’s apparent fondness for the MB. That apparent fondness is buttressed by the InvestigativeProject.org, (IP) which insisted in 2013 that “(S)ix American Islamist activists who work with the Obama administration are Muslim Brotherhood operatives who enjoy strong influence over U.S. policy.” They include Arif Alikhan, assistant secretary for policy development for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Mohammed Elibiary, homeland security advisor; Salam al-Marayati, Obama advisor, and founder of Muslim Public Affairs Council and its current executive director; Imam Mohamed Magid, Obama’s sharia czar for the Islamic Society of North America; Eboo Patel, advisory council on Faith-Based Neighborhood Partnerships; and Rashad Hussain, special envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC).

The OIC is an organization dedicated to intimidating Western nations to adopt hate speech codes that would effectively prohibit criticism of Islam. Nonetheless in February, Hussain was appointed by the president as coordinator for the Center for Strategic Counterterrorism Communications, heading the administration’s efforts to wage digital war against terrorist propagandists.

It’s a curious choice. In 2004 Hussain insisted former University of South Florida professor Sami al-Arian, who ultimately pled guilty to charges in the Holy Land Foundation terrorist funding case, was the victim of “politically motivated persecution” designed “to squash dissent.” That quote was published by the jihadist-enabling Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (WRMEA) in November 2004. WRMEA subsequently removed the quote, and then tried to attribute it to Sami Al-Arian’s daughter, Laila Al-Arian. The author of the original story, Shereen Kandil, contradicted that assertion. In fairness to Hussain, and despite the assertion made by IP, he may be nothing more than an MB sympathizer. His membership in the MB has not been confirmed

Hussain was appointed following Obama’s conference on countering violent extremism last February, highlighted by the president’s ongoing refusal to label violent terrorists as “radical Islamists.” That conference took place less than a month after Obama outraged Egypt and Saudi Arabia by hosting MB members at the White House, despite their ouster from the corridors of power by current Egyptian President Abdel al-Fattah al-Sisi, who considers them a terrorist organization. Al-Sisi has emerged as the one Muslim leader arguing for an Islamic reformation, and he was undoubtedly dismayed by an Obama administration still willing to embrace his nation’s enemies.

Even more embarrassing, the State Department ultimately admitted to deliberately lying about the event. After initially insisting it had been “organized and funded by Georgetown University,” who denied that assertion, State finally set the record straight—because MB members bragged about the meeting on social media. MB members were shown flashing Brotherhood gang signs at the State Department building—and they made claims the Obama Administration supports their efforts to overthrow al-Sisi’s government.

As Breitbart News notes, the MB “craves legitimacy,” and the Obama administration appears more than willing to facilitate it. And while the Egyptian media’s assertion that the president himself is an MB member may sound far-fetched, the ongoing relationship between the president and an organization that fought for the Nazis during WWII is despicable.

And lest anyone think the MB’s status in Washington would be diminished by the election of Hillary Clinton, think again. Her aide Huma Abedin’s family has extensive familial ties to the MB, which may go a long way towards explaining Clinton’s purge of her emails and the server that contained them. Abedin also violated State Department policy regarding email retention and the Department’s Inspector General (IG) is conducting an investigation into that reality. While he’s at it, maybe he could reveal to the American public exactly how Abedin received security clearance giving her access to classified information.

As long as the America is at war with “radical extremism,” it would be refreshing to know where everyone associated with the Muslim Brotherhood stands—in no uncertain terms. It is worth remembering the Bush administration was excoriated for failing to “connect the dots” prior to 9/11, despite the reality that no prior administration had anticipated the lethality of Islamist extremism. That position is no longer tenable.

Like this:

At long last the Department of State is investigating why a top Hillary Clinton aide with generational ties to Islamic terrorism was allowed to work in a sensitive government position while simultaneously working for a Clinton-connected private sector consulting firm.

Hillary Clinton and the senior aide, Huma Abedin, apparently conspired to keep the sweetheart working arrangement that the Muslim Brotherhood-linked employee had at Foggy Bottom a secret. Because it involves a Clinton, the story is, of necessity, complex and convoluted. And it’s classic Hillary as she tiptoes through a minefield of ethics violations, conflicts of interest, and potential national security-related breaches.

News of the probe came two days before the Benghazi bungler finally launched her long-awaited coronation parade campaign Sunday on YouTube.

“I’m running for president,” Mrs. Clinton said in the video. “Americans have fought their way back from tough economic times. But the deck is still stacked in favor of those at the top. Everyday Americans need a champion and I want to be that champion.”

Yes, Clinton is a champion — of Islamic expansionism. She let four Americans die in 2012 so President Obama, in the midst of his reelection fight, wouldn’t have to reconcile the terrorist attack on a U.S. consulate in Libya with his dishonest boast that al-Qaeda was on the run under his leadership. That she hired someone of questionable loyalty to the United States shouldn’t surprise anyone.

Until Sunday the Clinton Foundation had served as a de facto campaign headquarters and international shakedown machine for Mrs. Clinton. With her campaign now officially on, the foundation will probably continue functioning as what the Wall Street Journal‘s Kimberly Strassel calls “The Clinton Foundation Super PAC.”

“Most family charities exist to allow self-made Americans to disperse their good fortune to philanthropic causes,” Strassel wrote in a recent column. “The Clinton Foundation exists to allow the nation’s most powerful couple to use their not-so-subtle persuasion to exact global tribute for a fund that promotes the Clintons.”

Abedin herself is a Muslim who is married to disgraced former U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.). Bill and Hillary Clinton are reportedly so close to her that they have called her their surrogate daughter. Abedin, who almost certainly played some kind of a role in the Obama administration’s myriad catastrophic foreign policy failures, currently works at Mrs. Clinton’s personal office in New York City — or at least she worked there as of last week before Hillary launched her campaign.

Very few Republican lawmakers who are critical of Abedin’s working arrangement have raised the alarm about the threat she poses to national security. Some may have been scared away after the grandstanding stunt pulled three years ago by know-nothing Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). He bristled with indignation when then-Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) and a handful of House lawmakers raised legitimate concerns about Abedin working in such a sensitive government post. McCain thundered: Abedin’s “character, reputation, and patriotism” were unjustly attacked and “these attacks on Huma have no logic, no basis, and no merit, and they need to stop now.”

State Department Inspector General Steve Linick sent a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) Thursday advising that the inner workings of the “Special Government Employee Program” at the department are now the subject of a preliminary inquiry by Linick’s office. (The document is available here.)

“This program is meant to be used in a limited way to give the government special expertise it can’t get otherwise,” Grassley said in a statement Friday. “Is the program working the way it’s intended at the State Department or has it been turned on its head?”

Amazingly enough, the Obama-loving media establishment has been on this case of ethical gymnastics and the potential compromise of U.S. national security for a while.

As the New York Times reported two years ago, under Clinton the Department of State “created an arrangement for her longtime aide and confidante Huma Abedin to work for private clients as a consultant while serving as a top adviser in the department.”

On her mandatory financial disclosure form, Abedin failed to disclose the setup or how much she was paid. “[T]he picture that emerges from interviews and records suggests a situation where the lines were blurred between Ms. Abedin’s work in the high echelons of one of the government’s most sensitive executive departments and her role as a Clinton family insider.”

In a July 2013 letter the State Department indicated Abedin was employed full-time from January 2009 to June 2012. It also indicated she did not disclose outside employment when ending her full-time status. The department kept her on as an adviser-expert at the hourly rate of $74.51 with maximum pay of $155,500 per year.

When Abedin returned from maternity leave in mid-2012, her role as deputy chief of staff to Secretary Clinton ended and she became what’s called a special government employee, or consultant. A State Department official told the Old Gray Lady “that change freed her from the requirement that she disclose her private earnings for the rest of the year on her financial disclosure forms. Still, during that period, she continued to be identified publicly in news reports as Mrs. Clinton’s deputy chief of staff.”

It goes without saying that the Clintons have long believed that rules and laws are for the little people, not them. They live by the maxim that it is better to ask for forgiveness after the fact than seek permission before doing something awful.

In the second half of 2012 while working at State as a consultant, Abedin also worked for Teneo, a high-flying consultancy established by Doug Band, who was an adviser to President Clinton. Teneo advised MF Global, the failed brokerage of Democrat Jon Corzine, former governor of New Jersey and former U.S. senator.

“At the same time, Ms. Abedin served as a consultant to the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation and worked in a personal capacity for Mrs. Clinton as she prepared to transition out of her job as secretary of state,” the newspaper reported. (The foundation has since changed its name to the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation.)

The head of the liberal group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) at the time, Melanie Sloane, engaged in Monty Pythonesque understatement when she described Abedin’s special working arrangement as merely unusual. “If she was being held out as a deputy chief of staff, it would be highly unusual for her to be a part-time employee or a consultant,” Sloane said. “Being a deputy chief of staff at the State Department is generally considered more than a full-time job.”

So Abedin was double- or even triple-dipping, working on sensitive issues in the Obama administration while at the same time working as a consultant at Teneo and the Clinton Foundation.

Political commentators might be more outraged over the Abedin affair but for the fact that the Clintons have always been shady operators. It’s scandal fatigue.

There are so many Clinton scandals that Wikipedia had to create an index page to list them all. Clinton-watching is an exhausting hobby that will turn into a full-time job for multitudes of talking heads, journalists, columnists, and activists should the Clintons take up residence in the White House again.

In the meantime we are left to wonder what role Abedin played in a long list of irregularities, mishaps, scandals, and America-weakening events while serving at the Department of State.

*the removal of longstanding ally Hosni Mubarak as president of Egypt followed by the installation of Muslim Brotherhood favorite Mohamed Morsi in the position

*the conversion of NASA into a Muslim outreach agency

*the odious, lie-strewn “A New Beginning” speech President Obama gave at Cairo University in 2009

All these things that happened on then-Secretary Clinton’s watch. And they happened while the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Foundation reportedly raked in millions of dollars in donations from the governments of Muslim countries including the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Kuwait, Qatar, Oman, and Algeria.

Call them anticipatory bribes thrown over the transom in case Mrs. Clinton secures the presidency. (Statistics wiz Nate Silver says Clinton is a virtual shoo-in for her party’s nomination but gives her roughly a 50/50 chance of winning the general election.)

As Hillary was screwing up America’s foreign policy, Bill was giving highly remunerative speeches in the Islamic nations of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, UAE, and Turkey, according to Judicial Watch.

For what it’s worth, President Obama’s Cairo speech came on the heels of his worldwide apology tour in which he begged forgiveness from the countries of the world supposedly oppressed for so long by the U.S.

The oration was a major propaganda victory for Islamism that has emboldened fanatics and terrorists worldwide. It was also jam-packed with falsehoods, according to academics Mary Grabar and Brian Birdnow.

The address, of course, is a breathtaking work of fiction that whitewashes the blood-drenched history of Islam and falsely attributes accomplishments such as printing, navigation, and medicine to the Islamic world.

Obama gave Islam credit for un-Islamic things such as the Enlightenment and religious tolerance. Islam “carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for European Renaissance and Enlightenment,” and “has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality,” Obama said.

Grabar and Birdnow counter that in fact “the intellectual Renaissance began when Byzantine scholars, mostly Greek, fled the advancing Turks in the 14th century and settled in Italy. The Enlightenment was openly anti-theistic and would have been anathema to most practicing Muslims.”

Moreover, they add, “Muslims wiped out Zoroastrianism, they battled Hinduism and Buddhism for centuries, and they levied a special tax on Christians and Jews in their domains.”

The lies in the Obama speech would no doubt be embraced by Abedin’s family. Born in 1976 in Kalamazoo, Michigan, Abedin’s connections to the Muslim Brotherhood run deep.

Her mother is Saleha Mahmood Abedin, widow of the late Zyed Abedin, an academic who taught at Saudi Arabia’s prestigious King Abdulaziz University in the early 1970s. The year after Huma was born, Mrs. Abedin received a Ph.D. in sociology from the University of Pennsylvania. She is a founding member of the Muslim Sisterhood, a pro-Sharia organization consisting of the wives of some of the highest-ranking leaders in the Muslim Brotherhood.

In 1978 Mr. Abedin was hired by Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA), a Saudi-based Islamic think tank created by Abdullah Omar Naseef. Naseef was a Muslim extremist with ties to al-Qaeda. In 1983 he became secretary-general of the Muslim World League (MWL), a militant organization with links to Osama bin Laden.

The elder Abedins both became members of the editorial board of IMMA’s publication, the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs. According to Andrew C. McCarthy, IMMA’s “Muslim Minority Affairs” agenda is “to grow an unassimilated, aggressive population of Islamic supremacists who will gradually but dramatically alter the character of the West.”

Mrs. Abedin became an official representative of MWL in the 1990s. When her husband died in 1994, Mrs. Abedin became the IMMA’s director. She currently serves as editor-in-chief of its journal.

Mrs. Abedin is also a member of the board of the International Islamic Council for Dawa and Relief (IICDR), which has long been banned in Israel because it has ties to Hamas. (In Arabic, dawah, or dawa, means the proselytizing or preaching of Islam.) She also runs the Amman, Jordan-based International Islamic Committee for Woman and Child (IICWC), a Muslim World League affiliate that self-identifies as part of the IICDR. The league, according to Andrew C. McCarthy, “has long been the Muslim Brotherhood’s principal vehicle for the international propagation of Islamic supremacist ideology.” Huma Abedin was an intern in the Clinton White House between 1997 and some time in 1999, she was a member of the executive board of George Washington University’s radical Muslim Students Association (MSA). The MSA has extensive ties to al-Qaeda. From 1996 to 2008, she was employed by IMMA as assistant editor of its Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs.

Someone with Abedin’s background shouldn’t be anywhere near the levers of power in Washington. Yet Hillary Clinton trusted her with vital secrets of state and then surreptitiously deleted their electronic correspondence.

Were Secretary Clinton’s dealings with the foreign governments that gave money to the Clinton Foundation discussed in the emails that she deleted from her now-infamous private email server? We may never know.

There is, nonetheless, some reason for hope. Yes, it is depressing that even as evidence continues to accumulate that Mrs. Clinton’s cavalier approach to state secrets put U.S. national security in jeopardy, the shady background of Abedin is barely acknowledged on Capitol Hill.

Republican lawmakers seem for the most part unaware of Abedin’s ties to the world of Islamic terrorism, or like John McCain, remain stubbornly in denial.

But with the State Department Inspector General’s investigation set in motion, there is at least a possibility something will be discovered about Abedin that will spark the interest of the party whose elected officials now dominate both chambers of Congress.

The exposure of Huma Abedin is vitally important to the national security of the United States.

Turkish president’s slams Sisi for treatment of political prisoners.

By REUTERS

ISTANBU – Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan said Egypt should free ousted Islamist president Mohamed Mursi from jail and lift death sentences against his supporters before Ankara could consider an improvement in relations with Cairo.

Ties between the two former allies have been strained since then Egyptian army chief Abdel Fattah al-Sisi toppled elected President Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood in 2013 after mass protests against his rule.
Egyptian security forces then mounted one of the fiercest crackdowns against the Islamist movement, killings hundreds of supporters at a Cairo protest camp, arresting thousands and putting Morsi and other leaders on trial.

“Mr Morsi is a president elected by 52 percent of the votes. They should give him his freedom,” Erdogan was quoted by Turkish newspapers as telling reporters traveling on his plane as he returned from an official visit to Iran.

An official from Erdogan’s office confirmed his comments.

Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood has close ties with Turkey’s ruling AK Party, which Erdogan co-founded and which has emerged as one of the fiercest international critics of Morsi’s removal, calling it an “unacceptable coup” by the army.

Erdogan’s recent visit to Saudi Arabia, and his support of a Saudi-led military operation against Houthi rebels in Yemen in which Egyptian warships have taken part, have triggered speculation about a possible thaw in ties between Ankara and Cairo.

Erdogan had more conditions before that could happen, and reiterated his criticism of Western countries for not being more vocal about Egypt’s treatment of political prisoners.

“Secondly, doesn’t the West say it is against the death sentence? There are 3,000 people there sentenced to death. This should be lifted,” Erdogan said, when he was asked if there was any chance of rapprochement in relations with Cairo.
Egyptian courts have sentenced hundreds of alleged Brotherhood supporters to death in recent months, many in mass trials condemned by foreign governments and rights groups as violating international law.

Erdogan said there were around 18,000 political prisoners who should be retried and bans on political parties in Egypt, which he says are arbitrary, should be removed.

“They say ‘Turkey should not interfere with our domestic affairs’. We are not interfering. If something happens in a country against freedoms, we should speak up,” Erdogan said.

Egypt has complained about previous comments made by Erdogan against Sisi and rejected Turkey’s criticism of the government.

Like this:

In The Manchurian Candidate, the son of a prominent right-wing politician is captured by the Soviets and brainwashed in a secret Manchurian location. His task is to assassinate a presidential candidate, thus ensuring the election of the demagogic vice-president. Hence, the title “Manchurian Candidate.”

The film has several parallels to current events. The main difference is that in those days, Americans had to be brainwashed into serving enemy interests by psy-ops teams. Nowadays, they come self-brainwashed with some indoctrinative assist from the American educational system.

In the film, a scary lady with leftist sympathies who looks vaguely like Hillary Clinton manipulates her husband into high political office. In real life, a scary lady with leftist leanings who looks vaguely like Angela Lansbury (only scarier) manipulates herself into high political office.

In her case, teams of brainwashers are not required, since she has brainwashed herself into believing that foreign governments are dumping truckloads of cash into her family foundation because she’s such a charming and intelligent woman. And also because Arab sovereigns like nothing better than to do their part to improve the lives of the poor, the hungry, the environmentally underserved, and kids who need braces—in short, the very causes for which the foundation was founded.

Another similarity is that in the film, the Angela Lansbury character has some sort of hypnotic power over her son, the unwitting assassin. Whenever it begins to dawn on him that something funny is going on, she flashes a Queen of Diamonds playing card and he falls into a catatonic state of complete obedience. In the present situation the Angela Lansbury look-alike has merely to flash the gender card and, presto, skeptical voters fall back into line.

There are parallels to other movies as well. Today’s Queen of Diamonds has a secret server in her home so that her exchanges with foreign dono—I mean “diplomats”—can’t be traced. I’m not sure if the server takes up only one room of the palatial house, or a whole suite of rooms. And who knows what’s in the cavern-like basement? It’s all faintly reminiscent of those James Bond thrillers in which the villain’s remote island estate sits atop a vast underground military-industrial complex.

At some point the analogy breaks down. You could still convince a sixties audience that leftists were willing to sell out the country. We, on the other hand, have convinced ourselves that we live in a brave new world where such things never happen—at least, not in modern Western societies. No one would dare to pull a fast one on us because we’re just too smart. We’ve grown up watching CSI, we went to schools that taught critical thinking, and our history texts were written by Howard Zinn. We’ve also been nurtured on relativism, so if it were discovered that Arabs controlled the White House, we would shrug our shoulders and say, “at this point, what does it matter?”

The Clinton-Arab connection actually goes back to the time when Bill Clinton was governor of Arkansas and worked to secure a hefty Saudi contribution to a Middle-Eastern studies program at the University of Arkansas. But let’s skip all that and fast forward to relatively recent times when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton appointed her longtime aide Huma Abedin as Deputy Chief of Staff at the State Department. When it was discovered that Abedin’s family was deeply involved in the Muslim Brotherhood in Saudi Arabia, very few eyebrows were raised. After all, even President Obama had relatives in the Muslim Brotherhood. So it would have been silly to make something of it.

It’s probably just a coincidence that while working for the Clintons, Huma herself was the assistant editor of the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs which—you guessed it—is a Muslim Brotherhood journal. Before that, and while still interning at the White House, she was an executive board member of the Muslim Student Association (MSA) at George Washington University. The MSA was the first Muslim Brotherhood organization in the United States and George Washington was the first Muslim president. Well, the latter hasn’t yet been firmly established, but it’s just a matter of time until those Saudi-funded Mid-East studies professors at the University of Arkansas and the Saudi-funded professors at Georgetown (Bill’s alma mater) discover the prayer rug in the attic at Mount Vernon. It’s also probably a coincidence that, like her boss, Huma conducted State Department business using her own personal e-mail address, connected, one supposes, to the same master server that served her master so well… er, mistress.

Abedin also worked until recently for the Clinton Foundation. Again, this is no doubt a pure coincidence and, as the old saying goes, it has nothing to do with Islam. Although CSI investigators would have a field day with such coincidences, today’s government officials seem curiously lacking in curiosity. In 2012, Michelle Bachmann and four other House members wrote letters to the Inspector Generals of several government agencies asking them to conduct an investigation into Muslim Brotherhood penetration of the government. They were particularly concerned about Human Abedin in view of her family connections and influential position. They noted that the Clinton State Department had “taken actions recently that have been enormously favorable to the Muslim Brotherhood and its interests.”

The request was dismissed by numerous congressmen and senators as “offensive,” “insensitive,” and even “hurtful.” By that time the machinery of the “Islamophobia” industry was already in high gear and it was deemed prudent even by Republicans to defend Abedin and to damn her accusers as McCarthyites.

Still, the case for an inquiry seemed strong. As one McCarthyite, former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy, observed, even if Abedin was innocent of any wrongdoing, the State Departments own guidelines about foreign family connections would disqualify her for a security clearance for such a sensitive position.

But then, again, a lot of people in sensitive positions don’t seem to qualify for a security clearance. For example, if all your closest relatives were leftists or communists, if your chief mentors were, respectively, a member of the Communist Party and a radical left-wing preacher, and if you used to hang out with known terrorists, you probably couldn’t get a job as a night watchman at an auto parts warehouse. On the other hand, if someone with the same background throws his hat into the presidential ring, he can become Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy, and get to set foreign policy.

He also gets to appoint Secretaries of State. It shouldn’t be any surprise if they turn out to be the kind of people who can’t be bothered with security checks. Such people seem to live in an ethereal realm that puts them above suspicion and above conflicts of interest. Normally, when a Secretary of State receives tens of millions in donations from countries that support the spread of a radical ideology, it would be a sign that something is terribly wrong. For an analogy, ask yourself if you would keep someone on at your firm if she had access to sensitive trade secrets and yet received huge gifts from rival corporations while conducting company business on her private server.

You would probably get rid of her pronto. But that’s only if you apply the normal rules of logic—which apparently don’t apply to Secretaries of State appointed by President Obama. If you applied such logic, you might also think there was something awkward about the fact that current Secretary of State John Kerry’s daughter is married to an Iranian who has extensive family ties in Iran. As Kenneth Timmerman points out, the FBI usually won’t grant security clearance to “individuals who are married to nationals of an enemy nation or have family members living in that country, for fear of divided loyalties or, more simply, blackmail.” Of course, you would have to be some kind of conspiracy nut to think that having vulnerable in-laws in Iran would in any way compromise Secretary Kerry’s negotiations with the representatives of a country whose leaders routinely indulge in “death to America” rhetoric.

Undoubtedly, the President consulted with his senior adviser Valerie Jarrett about the matter. Since Jarrett was born in Iran and spoke Persian as a child, she would, by current standards of expertise, be assumed to have deep insight into the Persian mind. She could have assured the president that “Great Satan” and “Death to America” are typical of the rhetorical exuberance that characterizes the rich and vibrant Iranian culture. Moreover, she could have allayed any concerns about blackmail. Anyone who has studied “Cliff Notes on Islam” knows that blackmail runs counter to the deeply held beliefs of the mullahs.

Jarretts’ family left Iran when she was five, but apparently those five years were enough to qualify her as an expert on Iranian affairs. According to Discover the Networks, it was revealed in 2012 that for several months, Jarrett “had been leading secret negotiations with representatives of Iran’s Supreme leader… in an effort to normalize relations between the U.S. and Iran.”

The mind spins at the –what’s the word?—the audacity of it all. But the curious thing is not that there are people in high places willing to put self-interest ahead of the national interest. Such people are always with us. The curious thing is that the American people and the American press accept it with such equanimity. During the Obama-Clinton-Kerry-Jarrett-Abedin years, Russia seized the Crimea, ISIS seized large parts of Iraq and Syria, the Taliban re-established itself in Afghanistan, allies stopped trusting us, enemies were emboldened, the Middle East was set on fire, and the Army was drastically reduced. Oh, and the way was cleared for Iran to have nuclear bombs. Future generations—if there are any—will wonder what we were thinking.

What we were thinking, they may discover, goes something like this (in shorthand brain language): “Mustn’t think that! Mustn’t say that! Not nice! What will people think!” You’d have to go back to the Victorian era to find another society with so much concern for propriety of thought and speech. Thomas Sowell put his finger on the phenomenon in a recent editorial. When it comes to matters of survival, he observed, we have “put questions of etiquette above questions of annihilation.”

He’s right. A sort of suicidal etiquette that chokes off common sense has grown up in our society. Under the rules of the new etiquette, we aren’t allowed to say that the Emperor has no clothes. We dare not even point out that the Emperor and his ministers appear to be throwing open the gates to the enemy.

Let’s see: The people of the United States elect as president a man they know very little about. When it becomes obvious that he has deep leftist sympathies combined with deep Islamist sympathies, they elect him again. He, in turn, appoints one Secretary of State who is beholden to Arab largesse, and then, after she steps down, he replaces her with a man who practices folk-song diplomacy and has close family ties with Iran.

The Manchurian Candidate? On one level, the current situation is so full of farce, that a serious drama like The Manchurian Candidate couldn’t do it justice. If you were to make a movie of the current mandarin mess, it might be better to play it for laughs—an Austin Powers-type spoof or something along the lines of Abbott and Costello meet the Manchurian Candidate.

On another level, the situation is so fraught with apocalyptic dangers that only a deadly serious doomsday film—something along the lines of Fail Safe—could bring home the enormity of our current folly. In any event, there’s a title ready made for it. If the first Obama election could be called Death Wish I, and his re-election, Death Wish II, then the election of Hillary Clinton would deservedly merit the title, Death Wish III—The Final Chapter.

William Kilpatrick is the author of Christianity, Islam, and Atheism: The Struggle for the Soul of the West. Visit his site, turningpointproject.com, for more of his commentaries.

Like this:

There are some Israelis who support the manipulation of the facts of the history of Israel, from the story of the Jews under Muslim rule to the very legitimacy of the state.

Norway will host a conference during the week ahead on Jews under Islamic rule. A read through the lecture program reveals that the central line of the conference will be that the Jews lived wonderful lives under Muslim rule, until the Zionists came along, snatched them from their Muslim health resort, and enslaved them in Israel. I may be selling some of the participants short; perhaps someone there will have something of value to say. It’s been known to happen on occasion – even in the academe.

The thing is, the main guest from Israel, the great expert on the history of the Jews under Muslim rule, who is also a great expert on the situation of the Arab Jews under the rule of the Zionists, who is also the great expert on the situation of the Muslims under Jewish rule, is – hold on to your hats – Gideon Levy.

Iraqi Jews make way to Israel

For the most part, Jews lived under Muslim rule as subjects of inferior status. Now and then there were periods, during a part of the Golden Age for example, in which Jews were generally accepted in society and Jewish religious, cultural, and economic life flourished.

When the Christians expelled the Jews from Spain, the Ottoman sultan was the one who invited them to settle in his empire. The colonial era saw another period of flourishing Jewish life under Muslim rule. These periods, however, were the exception.

Some academics have managed to turn the tables. They glorify the periods of coexistence. They hide the pogroms, the decrees, the abuse and the oppression. And they certainly hide the Jewish Nakba. The Jews didn’t suffer from abuse and oppression because of Zionism. To the contrary. They became Zionists because of the abuse and oppression. But manipulating the facts will triumph once again – under the patronage of Gideon Levy and so-called academic freedom.

And while we’re on the subject of the academe, it’s worth mentioning that the University of Southampton in Britain will be hosting a conference in April on the very legitimacy of the State of Israel.

“This conference will be the first of its kind and constitutes a ground-breaking historical event,” says the invitation, as it “concerns the legitimacy in International Law of the Jewish state of Israel.”

The invitation makes it clear that the conference this time will not be dealing with Israel’s actions, but “will focus on exploring themes of Legitimacy, Responsibility and Exceptionalism; all of which are posed by Israel’s very nature.”

There’s an Israeli among the organizers too – Professor Oren Ben-Dor, another one of those wild weeds, those BDS supporters, who reject the right of the Jews to a state and try to sell us the same old goods, believing that silencing Israelis who think differently is the true expression of freedom of speech and thought. And now this evil man is organizing a conference that essentially negates the existence of Israel. Hamas doesn’t need a propaganda department. It already has PR agents doing the work.

Fascinating pairings

The upcoming elections are producing some fascinating pairings. Feminists are voting Shas, a prominent settler is backing Balad, and good Jews think that an Arab party is the true expression of the democratic vision. We’re in an election period. There’s no need for any media deception. What we have here is self-deception.

Honey drips from the lips of Ayman Odeh, head of the newly formed united Arab party. All the innocent man seeks after all is equality. The same Odeh is also chairman of the Committee Against National Service, which was established by the Higher Arab Monitoring Committee. The leaders of this so-called democratic party brand young Arabs who wish to do national service – and the majority do – “lepers.” The leaders of this enlightened party incited against father Gabriel Nadaf, who supports equal rights and equal obligations. Nadaf claimed at the time, and rightly so, that the Communist-Islamic coalition – known around the world as a red-green coalition, a coalition between the radical left and radical Islam – was acting against him. And this is the coalition that makes up the united Arab party.

In the Muslim world, the jihadists kill the communists. This is exactly what Hamas says in its broadcasts: “Kill the Jews, the Christians and the Communists – to the last man.” Now, the Hamas supporters are sitting alongside the Communists – and it’s so good to see that there are useful Jewish idiots around to jump on the bandwagon.

There’s another fascinating – and no less odd – pairing. Dani Dayan, former chairman of the Yesha Council, found just the right thing to say to prove the case of the proponents of a Greater Israel: “What’s the difference from a moral perspective between the settlements and the kibbutzim?” he asked. “The settlements are much better because they were established alongside the Palestinian communities, whereas kibbutzim were established on their ruins.”

And in whom is this settlement-enterprise supporter placing his trust? MK Jamal Zahalka from the joint Arab list. There is indeed a common thread between Palestinian nationalism and Jewish nationalism. Both are leading us by the nose, in various ways, towards the gradual demise of the Jewish and democratic state.

George Orwell once said that there were some ideas so foolish that only intellectuals could nurture them. And here we have two examples – from the left and from the right.